Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Controlling Coherent Quantum Dot Interactions

Mesoscale and Nanoscale Physics · Submitted 12 May 2017

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We propose this effect as a method for controlling coupling between quantum states.

how it is stated · hedged possibility 0.65 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1705.04730 (version 2)
Pith IDJ64MDF5I, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationEric W. Martin, Steven T. Cundiff. "Controlling Coherent Quantum Dot Interactions." arXiv:1705.04730 (2017). https://pith.science/paper/J64MDF5I
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,525 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.07 · states limitation 0.50 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.09 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.07 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We measure many-body interactions in isolated quantum dot states using double-quantum multidimensional coherent spectroscopy. Few states are probed in a diffraction limited spot, which is enabled by a novel collinear scheme in which radiated four-wave-mixing signals are measured with phase resolution. Many-body interactions are enhanced by an additional prepulse tuned to the delocalized quasi-continuum states. We propose this effect as a method for controlling coupling between quantum states.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We measure many-body interactions in isolated quantum dot states using double-quantum multidimensional coherent spectroscopy. contribution 0.69 0.96 0.07 asserted 1.00
s1 Few states are probed in a diffraction limited spot, which is enabled by a novel collinear scheme in which radiated four-wave-mixing signals are measured with phase resolution. method 0.97 0.83 0.04 asserted 1.00
s2 Many-body interactions are enhanced by an additional prepulse tuned to the delocalized quasi-continuum states. result 0.97 0.84 0.15 asserted 1.00
s3 We propose this effect as a method for controlling coupling between quantum states. interpretation 0.78 0.39 0.73 hedged possibility 0.65

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 0.71 · evidence from observation or experiment 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We measure many-body interactions in isolated quantum dot states using double-quantum multidimensional coherent spectroscopy. Few states are probed in a diffraction limited spot, which is enabled by a novel collinear scheme in which radiated four-wave-mixing signals are measured with phase resolution. Many-body interactions are enhanced by an additional prepulse tuned to the delocalized quasi-continuum states. We propose this effect as a method for controlling coupling between quantum states.

Human review

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.